ghl_create_contact

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only mentions 'Returns the created contact object' as behavioral context. It does not disclose validation requirements, duplicate handling, idempotency, auth needs, or the fact that all parameters are optional, leaving significant uncertainty for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place; no unnecessary filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 16 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and only 25% schema description coverage, this description is severely under-specified. It fails to explain required vs optional fields, return structure beyond 'object', relationship to upsert, or any behavioral caveats. The agent is left without critical context needed for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 25%, and the description adds no meaning for the 16 parameters. It does not even mention that all fields are optional or explain key fields like email or customFields. The description provides zero parameter-level clarity beyond the schema itself.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Create'), the resource ('a new contact'), and the scope ('in the GHL location'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ghl_update_contact, ghl_upsert_contact, ghl_get_contact, and ghl_delete_contact.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus the closely related ghl_upsert_contact or ghl_update_contact. The phrase 'new contact' weakly implies use for new records, but there is no explicit when-not-to-use or alternative naming, leaving the agent to guess.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.